journal article Jan 17, 2020

Groundwater recharge sources in semiarid irrigated mountain fronts

Hydrological Processes Vol. 34 No. 7 pp. 1598-1615 · Wiley
View at Publisher Save 10.1002/hyp.13685
Abstract
AbstractHigh‐elevation mountains often constitute for basins important groundwater recharge sources through mountain‐front recharge processes. These processes include streamflow losses and subsurface inflow from the mountain block. However, another key recharge process is from irrigation practices, where mountain streamflow is distributed across the irrigated piedmont. In this study, coupled groundwater fluctuation measurements and environmental tracers (18O, 2H, and major ions) were used to identify and compare the natural mountain‐front recharge to the anthropogenically induced irrigation recharge. Within the High Atlas mountain front of the Ourika Basin, Central Morocco, the groundwater fluctuation mapping from the dry to wet season showed that recharge beneath the irrigated area was higher than the recharge along the streambed. Irrigation practices in the region divert more than 65% of the stream water, thereby reducing the potential for in‐stream groundwater recharge. In addition, the irrigation areas close to the mountain front had greater water table increases (up to 3.5 m) compared with the downstream irrigation areas (<1 m increase). Upstream crops have priority to irrigation with stream water over downstream areas. The latter are only irrigated via stream water during large flood events and are otherwise supplemented by groundwater resources. These changes in water resources used for irrigation practices between upstream and downstream areas are reflected in the spatiotemporal evolution of the stable isotopes of groundwater. In the upstream irrigation area, the groundwater stable isotope values (δ18O: −8.4‰ to −7.4‰) reflect recharge by the diverted stream water. In the downstream irrigation area, the groundwater isotope values are lower (δ18O: −8.1‰ to −8.4‰) due to recharge via the flood water. In the nonirrigation area, the groundwater has the highest stable isotope values (δ18O: −6.8‰ to −4.8‰). This might be due to recharge via subsurface inflow from the mountain block to the mountain front and/or recharge via local low altitude rainfall. These findings highlight that irrigation practices can result in the dominant mountain‐front recharge process for groundwater.
Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References
69
[9]
Boudhar A. "Energy fluxes and melt rate of a seasonal snow cover in the Moroccan high atlas" Hydrological Sciences Journal (2016)
[12]
Using hydraulic head, chloride and electrical conductivity data to distinguish between mountain-front and mountain-block recharge to basin aquifers

Etienne Bresciani, Roger H. Cranswick, Eddie W. Banks et al.

Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 10.5194/hess-22-1629-2018
[15]
Clark I. D. (1997)
[17]
Isotopic Variations in Meteoric Waters

Harmon Craig

Science 10.1126/science.133.3465.1702
[20]
Fakir Y. "Multi‐modeling assessment of recent changes in groundwater resource: Application to the semi‐arid Haouz plain (Central Morocco)" EGU General Assembly (2015)
[34]
Kenney D. S.(2005). Prior appropriation and water rights reform in the western United States. Lessons for institutional design 167. 10.2499/0896297497.ch7
[35]
Kruse E. G. (1990)
[38]
Liu F. (2015)
[40]
An integrated environmental tracer approach to characterizing groundwater circulation in a mountain block

Andrew H. Manning, D. Kip Solomon

Water Resources Research 10.1029/2005wr004178
[42]
Mountain‐Block Recharge: A Review of Current Understanding

Katherine H. Markovich, Andrew H. Manning, Laura E. Condon et al.

Water Resources Research 10.1029/2019wr025676

Showing 50 of 69 references

Metrics
51
Citations
69
References
Details
Published
Jan 17, 2020
Vol/Issue
34(7)
Pages
1598-1615
License
View
Cite This Article
Houssne Bouimouass, Younes Fakir, Sarah Tweed, et al. (2020). Groundwater recharge sources in semiarid irrigated mountain fronts. Hydrological Processes, 34(7), 1598-1615. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.13685